[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#893285: marked as done (stretch-pu: package docbook-to-man/1:2.0.0-35+deb9u1)

Your message dated Sun, 26 Apr 2020 17:52:19 +0200
with message-id <20200426155219.GA11669@chou>
and subject line Re: Bug#893285: stretch-pu: package docbook-to-man/1:2.0.0-35+deb9u1
has caused the Debian Bug report #893285,
regarding stretch-pu: package docbook-to-man/1:2.0.0-35+deb9u1
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
893285: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=893285
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: docbook-to-man
Version: 1:2.0.0-35
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org>

Hi,

docbook-to-man has some nasty undefined behaviour originally filed
as #842635. For example:

  https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/stretch/i386/tigr-glimmer.html

This was fixed in 1:2.0.0-36:

  https://github.com/lamby/pkg-docbook-to-man/commit/2f0659f3f7a5c59e30ed359b0a9daf171053675d

Please update stretch via -pu.


Regards,

-- 
      ,''`.
     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      lamby@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk
       `-

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 10:19:34PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> Control: reopen -1
> 
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 08:00:42PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > Hi Julien,
> > 
> > > I don't think that reaches the "warrants a stable update" level.  Please
> > > feel free to reopen if I'm missing something.
> > 
> > I defer to your best judgement. (Adrian, am adding you to CC as the
> > original requester of this stable update.)
> >...
> 
> Hi Julien,
> 
> depending on the details like the exact CPU type you are using,
> you might be getting correct or corrupted output files.
> 
> Whether the output is correct or corrupted can even depend on which 
> buildd was used to build a package.
> 
> The severity "normal" is correct since this are only corrupted manpages,
> but that is also the only output this package produces.
> 
> It is really a WTF when you look at the differences in
> https://tests.reproducible-builds.org/debian/rb-pkg/stretch/i386/tigr-glimmer.html
> 
> Regarding the fix, memcpy->memmove is among the lowest risk code changes.
> 
I wasn't saying there isn't a bug or the fix is bad or risky, just that
this bug IMO doesn't meet the bar for a stable update.

Cheers,
Julien

--- End Message ---
Reply to: